THE PREACHER WHO DOESN’T
TELL IT LIKE IT ISTHE TRUTH TWISTING AND TALL TALES
OF JOYCE MEYER

byPaul
R. Belli and G. Richard Fisher

Joyce Meyer has finally arrived into the top echelons of the Charismatic
“Big League.” Her image has appeared next to many of the “Who’s Who” of
Charismatic icons again and again in the pages of Charisma magazine.

Last November, she made it to the cover of the sensationalistic publication.
Charisma promised on the cover “Straight Talk From
Joyce Meyer,” and titled the inside cover story of the St. Louis-based Meyer,
“The Preacher Who Tells It Like It Is.” Her book sales are soaring as well, but
does Joyce Meyer really tell it like it is? That is — like it really is?

Meyer’s visibility these days has brought her such popularity that even some
of the Charismatic superstars have been writing articles for her ministry’s
monthly magazine, Life in the Word.

On occasion, the favor is reciprocated as Kenneth Copeland’s magazine, The
Believer’s Voice of Victory, has featured some of her articles. Yes, she
has definitely arrived in the “Top Ten.” However, for an already undiscerning
Church, this is not a good thing when you consider that she mirrors the
teachings of her unhealthy associations.

NOT A SINNER

For years, Charisma magazine has left a lot to be desired. Double
standards, subjective journalism, mysticism, attacks upon historic and orthodox
Christianity, and little regard for hermeneutics appear with frequency in the
magazine. The issue featuring Meyer was no exception.

Take, for example, the magazine’s slamming of those who have evaluated her
theology:

“Joyce is not the subject of intense controversy, but she has faced her
critics. Various cult-watchers have attacked her, including one who lambasted
her on St. Louis radio and challenged her to a debate (which she refused).”1

The “attack” to which Charisma alluded was the Dec. 7, 1995 edition
of Issues, Etc. (KFUO 850 AM in St. Louis). The program was hosted by
Lutheran Pastor Don Matzat and the featured guests for the show were none other
than the authors of this article.2Evidently,
the magazine or Meyer herself surmises that a systematic and biblical analysis
of her teaching (with primary documentation from her tapes and writings)
constitutes an “attack” or assault of some kind. Paul commended Bereans, while
the magazine castigates them.

Matzat, himself involved in the Charismatic movement from 1971-1986,
observed:

“Regarding the challenge, as I remember it, was nothing more than an open
invitation to Joyce to respond to our comments. Joyce
did not avail herself of the opportunity to respond on the air.”3

Like others in the Word-Faith camp who are uneducated, untrained and
unskilled in doctrine and systematic theology, Meyer is none too eager to
openly discuss the Christian faith with one who has worked hard to rightly
divide the Word of Truth. However, following the initial radio broadcast,
Matzat did have the opportunity to dialogue with Meyer and her husband, Dave.
Matzat, a friend of Dave’s family, recalled the meeting:

“We had a very nice chat. I told them exactly what I just said here. I
said, ‘You were distorting the doctrine of justification.’ I said, ‘What your
doctrine will lead to is what Ken Copeland teaches, that Jesus had to be born
again in hell. Because He’s simply a man dying for our sins.’
She did not reject what Ken Copeland teaches. She simply told me, ‘I am not
going to change what I teach.’”4

Meyer’s concept of sinless perfection is the most disturbing element to
Matzat. Meyer has claimed,

“Now whether you like it or not, whether you want to admit it or not,
whether you want to operate on it or not, you are made the righteousness of God
in Jesus Christ. Most people who go to denominational churches never ever hear
that! They never hear it! Never! All I was ever taught to say was, ‘I, a poor,
miserable sinner.’ I am not poor. I am not miserable. And I am not a sinner.
That is a lie from the pit of hell! That is what I were
[sic] and if I still was, then Jesus died in vain. Amen?”5

Meyer may be able to say she is not poor and not miserable. First John 1:8,
however, would preclude the rest of her comments about not being a sinner. Paul
thought himself to be the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15). As Christians we
are, after all, saved sinners.

Meyer’s comments point out the real issue: Just who is lambasting whom?
Meyer’s declaration clearly lambastes the theology of the Reformers, including,
most notably, Lutherans and Calvinists.

As noted in our previous Journal article, Meyer no longer distributes
the above tape with her perfectionistic ideas.6A
staff member from her ministry told PFO that the message is obsolete. What is
not clear is what part of or if the entire message is obsolete. One of
its major themes on the tape is the “born again Jesus” gospel. Yet it can be shown
that Meyer still distributes material promoting this heretical gospel, which
certainly suggests that she does not see it as entirely obsolete (at least for
the time being).

Moreover, when one examines the now obsolete tape, divine intervention and
direct revelation are stated as the source of her message:

“The Bible can’t even find any way to explain this. Not really. That’s
why you’ve got to get it by revelation. There are no words to explain
what I’m telling you. I’ve got to just trust God that He’s putting it into your
spirit like He put it into mine.”7

Having foolishly appealed to divine revelation and God’s impartation for the
message, she now, in essence, has made God culpable for an obsolete message.
Thus, one must ask, why does she continue to rely upon revelation knowledge
when it produces obsolete messages and indicts God as the author of heresy? And
how can the average listener discern which part of Meyer’s materials are biblical truth and which are destined for the trash heap
of obsolescence? The caution of Zechariah 13:4-5 regarding false prophets who
change their mind and their message bears consideration here.

JESUS IN HELL?

The Charisma article indicates that another of Meyer’s critics,
apologist Hank Hanegraaff, cited her booklet, The Most Important Decision
You Will Ever Make.8 Hanegraaff faulted Meyer for teaching that
Jesus was born again in hell. Meyer responded by stating that she does not
believe and has never taught that particular doctrine.

Whether Hanegraaff ever used the exact words, “Jesus was born again in hell”
or if the Charisma writer simply put those words in the Southern
California apologist’s mouth in an attempt to build a “straw man” is not clear.
What is clear, however, in spite of Meyer’s denials, is that in the fourth
chapter of her booklet, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make,
she:

• Teaches a born again Jesus.9

• Teaches that hell, not the cross, is where salvation was purchased.10

She not only delineates and defines the heresy but she blatantly defends it.

While Meyer may deny now that she has ever taught that “Jesus was born again
in hell,” she has not renounced the teaching nor denounced those who teach it.
Were she to do so, she most likely would neither have her picture in or on Charisma
magazine again, nor would she be invited to speak with the heretics who do
believe and teach it: her mentors and friends.

Based on the content of her book, turning to Christ would be the most impotent
decision one would ever make. By placing faith in “another Jesus” (2
Corinthians 11:4) as put forth in her booklet, a new “believer” would not be
entitled to the new covenant purchased with Jesus Christ’s blood. Rather, the
Jesus that Meyer proclaims, is a Jesus whose blood paid for nothing because his
“blood was made of no effect,” being “treated as an unholy thing” (Hebrews
10:29), because according to this teaching, Jesus’ payment was actually made by
suffering in hell. This teaching makes the “It is finished” of John 19:30 a
lie. First Corinthians 15:3 is very clear: “Jesus was crucified and died
for our sins,” not suffered in hell for our sins.

Thus, Meyer refuses to debate and will not “comment directly on such
opposition.” Is it any wonder that her husband remarked, “We let God respond”
and “That’s not our position, to try and come back and straighten them out”?

As noted above, neither Meyer nor her husband has the necessary theological
training to defend her indefensible teachings. The only reason the Meyers can
say that it’s not their “position” to respond and “straighten” us out is that
they fail to grasp the basics of biblical interpretation and hermeneutics. As a
result, it’s not that they won’t respond, it’s
because they cannot respond. “Let[ting] God
respond” is merely subterfuge. Strange how first-class, super-Christians, who
would have us believe they are tapping into divine revelation, can do all
things in Christ, except successfully defend their damnable doctrines of
demons.

As we read earlier, the Apostle Paul’s attitude was not to just let God
respond, but to get into the trenches and do what God called him to do,
namely to “cut the ground from under those who proclaim” another gospel.

Even worse, their response gives this issue the sense of unimportance. Much
to do about nothing! If it were, we would truly be wasting their time. Yet,
those in apologetics ministries are keenly aware that this is an essential
issue. Corrupting the Gospel produces heretical and damnable doctrine. Hence,
we take heed to the Scripture’s admonition to “earnestly contend for the faith
that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). We should not, and
cannot, do otherwise.

STOLEN WORDS

Stealing others’ errors is directly addressed by the Prophet Jeremiah:
“Therefore, declares the Lord, I am against the prophets who steal from one
another words supposedly from me. Indeed, I am against those who prophesy false
dreams, declares the Lord. They tell them and lead my people astray with their
reckless lies, yet I did not send or appoint them. They do not benefit these
people in the least, declares the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:30, 32).

In her booklet, The Most Important Decision You Will Ever Make, the
first subchapter heading is, WHAT HAPPENED ON THE CROSS? This heading is
strikingly similar to the title of Kenneth Copeland’s 1984 notorious sermon
tape, What Happened From The Cross To The Throne.
As earlier noted, Meyer also has a tape with the title, From the Cross to
the Throne. Not only are these titles similar, they each go into great
detail about the subject of what happened on, and more significantly, beyond
the cross of Christ. And they each go well beyond Scripture to teach the
heretical “born again Jesus” gospel.

While Meyer apparently borrowed her content from Copeland, Copeland in turn
presumably adopted the title from E.W. Kenyon’s book by the same name, as well
as the same heretical theme. Both Copeland’s and Kenyon’s works have become
“classics” within the Charismatic camp. In the 1980s, faith healer Benny Hinn
also taught the same heresy with the “revelation knowledge” tactic as its
source. He has since disavowed the teaching. Others committed to the teaching
include: Kenneth Hagin, Fred Price, Charles Capps, Paul and Jan Crouch and John
Jacobs (of The Power Team).

In summary (with few variations), the “born again Jesus” gospel teaches that
Jesus died two deaths, one physically upon the cross and the other spiritually
in hell. His Spirit literally became sin on the cross, taking on the very
nature of Satan, thereby being stripped of His Deity. He was ushered into hell
where He was tortured for three days and nights by Satan and his demons, was
reborn or “born again” in hell, reclaiming His Deity and finally rising bodily
from the dead.

The amount of fanciful “revelation knowledge” necessary to contradict the
clear teaching of Scripture, in order to teach the “born again Jesus” gospel,
is nothing short of amazing. Meyer, like her predecessors, offers the same
“you’ve got to get it by revelation” diversion.

This doctrine removes the clear teaching of Scripture that the atonement
took place upon the cross and places the event in hell. It is just one more
example how Satan strives to take our focus from the cross.

Although Meyer puts great value upon the “job” Jesus did, she misplaces where
He did it. When challenged about the unbiblical concept of this teaching,
Charismatics will often respond that it doesn’t matter where He atoned for our
sins. Strangely, Latter-day Saints offer the same rationale because their
version of Jesus Christ atoned for our sins in the Garden of Gethsemane.
Atonement in hell contradicts the Apostle Paul’s admonition to “never boast
except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world
has been crucified to me, and I to the world” (Galatians 6:14).

A JOB HELL
DONE?

As mentioned above, Meyer’s booklet focuses primarily upon the “born again
Jesus” gospel. This small volume is still being sold to the public. And the
teaching is not confined to just this one booklet. Consider these statements on
her tape, From the Cross to the Throne:

“And you’ve got to really glean some things out of the Word of God to
really get hold of what He [Jesus] did for you during those three days.”

“Jesus said, ‘It is finished.’ And He meant the Old Covenant. The job
He had to do was just getting started. He really did the job the three
days and nights that He was in hell. That’s where the job was done”
(emphasis added).

“He was pronounced guilty on the cross but He paid the price in hell.”

“All the hosts of hell was [sic] upon Him. Upon Him. They got on Him. They got Him down in the floor
and got on Him. And they were laughing and mocking.”

“Sunday morning, here comes the Son. Sunday morning, God gets Himself
together. Ho, hoooo. Justice has been met, somehow the
thing’s been taken care of. And ol’ God gets His voice together and He hollers
out three words and they go roaring through the universe and entering the gates
of hell. He said, ‘It is enough! It is enough!” (emphasis
in the original).

Can she prove that God actually said, “It is enough!
It is enough!”? Can she provide chapter and verse for such a declaration? No!
Only through the guise of “revelation knowledge” can such information be
provided. Yet, tragically, it is Kenyon, Copeland and others within the
Word-Faith camp who are her source for such knowledge. God plainly warns us:

“‘Yes,’ declares the Lord, ‘I am against the prophets who wag their own
tongues and yet declare, “The Lord declares”’” (Jeremiah 23:31).

He also warns:

“Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you
know that we who teach will be judged more strictly” (James 3:1).

Many able expositors have addressed the weakness of the Jesus-in-hell idea.
Former CRI researcher Brian Onken points out something that Meyer misses
entirely:

“Jesus appears to be conscious of the end of His redemptive suffering.
Furthermore it seems evident that His conscious fellowship with God the Father
was restored because of His subsequent self-committal: ‘Father, into thy hands
I commit My spirit’ (Luke 23:46).”11

Ephesians 1:7 is clear: “In Him we have redemption through His blood,
the forgiveness of sins.” Pastor Michael Moriarity emphatically affirms: “As
Christians, we affirm that our salvation is based solely on Christ’s atoning
work on the cross.”12 Moriarity’s book has a 22-page appendix dealing
with the whole issue of where Jesus atoned for sin.

WHAT IS REAL PROOF?

Meyer says “that the changed lives are proof enough,” that she’s “anointed
by God to do what I’m doing.”13 As is the Charismatic tendency, this
is a subjective posture. Every cult and aberrational sect on the face of the
Earth appeals to “changed lives” as a means of validating their claims that
they represent God. Latter-day Saints, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and others all
validate that they are “anointed by God” to do what they’re doing by virtue of
“changed lives.” As such, her logic is as flawed as cult logic. Meyer needs
something more concrete on which to base her claims. Remember, Christianity is
based on facts, not feelings. Holy Ghost “goose bumps,” liver quivers or even
subjective short-term change are not the confirmation
of the Christian faith.

Objectively speaking, her literature and tapes are “proof enough” that she
is not anointed! Listening to her twists, turns and changes could only lead one
to conclude that God is confused. Meyer’s appeal to have God’s blessing upon
her ministry is questionable when one considers that God does not empower the
vanguards of the Church to teach false and heretical doctrine.

Sadly, when careful exegetes of God’s Word challenge her theology, she
resorts to calling them “religious people” (pg. 55) who only criticize her for
not being as well-educated as they are and then appeals to her “anointing” as
proof that she is free to ignore them.

MISSING CHARACTER

While Meyer claims, “It’s important to me to have character and integrity,”14
she lacks those qualities when she uses red herrings such as the above in order
to evade any and every critic regardless of their status. Criticism directed to
her does not stem from her lack of education, it rather stems from her
heretical teachings. She not only lacks a sound understanding of Scripture, she
lacks integrity and a teachable spirit, the very things she boasts about.

Why does PFO make the charge of “unteachable”? When she met with Matzat to
discuss the issues that were brought up on the radio broadcast, she told him
that she was not going to change what she taught. This certainly emphasizes
that she is not willing to learn sound doctrine or repent of the heretical
teaching she promoted. The book of Proverbs is replete with admonitions that a
wise man is teachable. Meyer, apparently prefers to
hold onto teachings scraped from the garbage cans of the Word-Faith movement.

On the radio broadcast, Matzat spent a great deal of time in his
introduction of the program covering the issue of discernment and how it’s not
a matter of dealing with the person or getting personal. He took great pains to
explain this, “You don’t deal with the individual,
rather you deal with the concepts.” Matzat made the truth as palatable as
possible. It’s one thing to be confused or unclear on
an essential Christian doctrine such as the Gospel, but it’s an entirely
different matter when one adamantly refuses to acknowledge the truth when
confronted with it.

REAL CHANGE?

Meyer told Charisma that she has been radically changed from being
“angry, rebellious and hateful toward men” and “mean, ornery, sarcastic, sharp,
hard, bitter and full of resentment.”15 She even admitted to have
trouble submitting to her own pastor, “Acknowledging that their strong-willed
personalities clashed regularly.”16 The Lord has worked in her life,
she says, and the result is “an absolute, all-out, total miracle.”17
While there may have been a change in her life, the transformation falls short
of being a “miracle.”

Consider this example:

“And from here on, it probably wouldn’t do you one bit of good to try and
follow me. So if you’re taking notes, you can write down the Scriptures. Cause
very frankly, I’m not going to have time to wait on you.”18

Her words are not exactly what one could label a servant’s heart or a
demonstration of patience, nor much of a Christian display of love. Consider,
also, these comments:

“Don’t talk to anybody, don’t go to the bathroom, don’t go get a drink of
water, don’t move — just listen. Amen? I believe it’s that important.”19

When listening to her sermon tape in its entirety, there is ample evidence
that she possess an aura of haughtiness. For emphasis, she speaks just short of
yelling through the entire tape. There is no doubt in her mind that what she is
teaching is gospel truth. Unfortunately, if you first listen to Kenneth
Copeland’s version of this damnable teaching, it is obvious that Meyer simply
heisted not only his title, but his teaching as well. Plagiarizing someone else’s
material is bad enough, but plagiarizing heresy is even more regrettable. And
then naming God as the source is blasphemous.

While she may have mellowed with time, there doesn’t seem to be a radical
difference between the old and the new Joyce Meyer. The Charisma spin
attempts to soften her personality, but in fact demonstrates her continued
arrogance and combative spirit.

BAD THEOLOGY FOR GOOD

Meyer says that her exodus from the Lutheran church was because her
“charismatic beliefs fueled conflict with their congregation.”20
While she expresses gratitude to the Lutheran Church for her doctrinal
foundation,21 she quickly traded sound
teaching for the writings of mystics and heretics.

The Lutheran church certainly did not teach her to supplement “Bible study with
books such as Watchman Nee’s Spiritual Man, Brother Lawrence’s [The]
Practice of the Presence of God and the writings of Madame Guyon.”22

Charisma writer, Ken Walker, describes Guyon as “a 17th century
writer.” He fails to mention that Guyon was a French, Catholic mystic. PFO has
covered the terrible errors of Guyon in its article, “The Mindless Mysticism Of Madam Guyon,” showing the confusion and occultism of this
medieval mystic.23

Likewise, Brother Lawrence was a 17th century Catholic mystic, who claimed,
“That perfect resignation to God was a sure way to heaven.”24
Lawrence, typical of mystics, failed to realize that Jesus is the sure
and only way to Heaven (John 14:6).

Speaking of bad theology, it’s unfortunate that Vinson Synan, dean of the
School of Divinity at Regent University in Virginia, compares “Meyer to Baptist
pastor Charles Stanley, saying she can hold a crowd’s interest without fiery
rhetoric or sensational preaching.”25 That’s where the similarity
ends. Stanley’s views are neither in a state of change, nor
is his theology aberrant or heretical. Stanley and Meyer are on complete
opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to obeying Paul’s command to
rightly divide the Word of Truth.

IGNORANCE IS BLISS

In preparation for ministry, Meyer claims a divine call on her life, stating
“she sensed the Holy Spirit saying, ‘You are going all over the place to teach
My Word.’”26 While it is commendable for one to teach God’s Word, it
is imperative that one obeys God’s admonition to: “Do your best to present
yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and
who correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15) and “Watch your life
and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both
yourself and your hearers” (1 Timothy 4:16). One cannot be said to be properly
teaching God’s Word when they violate these commands.

Throughout Meyer’s rise into ministry, her mentors and the reservoirs from
which she has developed her theology are hazardous-waste sites. From 17th
century mystics to 20th century Word-Faith proponents, Meyer has fed on a
harmful diet of unbiblical teaching.

CANCEROUS TEACHING

While Meyer has been greatly influenced by the Word-Faith advocates, the
“health” message they preach has not been realized in her own physical
well-being. In her tape set, Overcoming Adversity, Meyer details her
fight with breast cancer and the mastectomy that followed.27

On the back of the album cover she reveals,

“During a routine checkup in 1989, doctors discovered that I had breast
cancer; and I was advised to have surgery immediately. Dave and I prayed and
sought God about what to do. Our children, staff, pastor, and friends all
prayed. For me, it would have been easier to say, ‘God will take care of me.
I’m not having the surgery.’ However, it would have been a statement of the
flesh — of presumption — not faith. At the time, I did not have the assurance
that only God can give to take such a stand. I had the surgery. The cancer had
not reached the lymph nodes, and I do not have cancer anymore!”

No matter how you view Meyer’s statement, it is confusing and inconsistent.
And it demonstrates that the “faith” message does not work. Once again, God
becomes culpable because He did not provide her with the assurance “to take
such a stand.” Apparently, Meyer has to come up with a rationale as to why she
went to a doctor and elected to have the surgery — which is a departure from
Word-Faith’s “health” gospel message and, in fact, a negative confession.

However, the “wealth” message certainly seems to be fulfilled in her life
and ministry. The Charisma article stated that approximately 600 radio
and television stations, plus seven cable networks and seven satellite networks
spanning the globe, carry her program. She adds 30,000 names to her mailing
list each month and has sold nearly three million tapes and close to a million
books last year.28This being the case, how
then does her ministry manage to grow at such a phenomenal rate? Does not this
signify the Spirit’s involvement and blessing upon her work?

Pastor Matzat offers this sane and revealing observation:

“Here is the deception in all this: A person gains a following, they get
a lot of money because they sell a lot of tapes, and think it’s the blessing of
God, when all they are doing is telling sinners what sinners want to hear. What
do sinners want to hear? I’m not a sinner! Of course, people flock to you for
that and therefore, it’s not the blessing of God. It’s simply a deception.”

Matzat further warns:

“Joyce Meyer is the classic case of an individual who knows absolutely no
theology, who has read a few books, picked up some ideas, takes some popular
notions then teaches them. It’s these kinds of people who are dangerous in the
Body of Christ because they know nothing. She has no grasp of historic
systematic theology. Basically what she’s doing is,
she’s going back to Rome with her understanding of sin. Because the Roman
Catholic church teaches that we are no longer bearing
the sinful nature. She has rejected the basic Reformational truth of
justification. She’s a heretic!”29

BLIND LEADING THE BLIND

Meyer maintains her “ministry is so important because we’re called to the
believers. We’re to help believers mature, and grow up.”30 Yet, how
can she fulfill such a noble “call” when she, herself, has no proper
understanding of the doctrine of justification and promotes a different gospel?
The Gospel is something every true believer should understand. Meyer’s confusion
on such a vital tenet of the Christian faith emphasizes an immaturity on her
part and an inability to help others. Rather, she is simply blindly leading the
blind.

She credits the devil with stealing the knowledge of her salvation as a
young believer.31 It would appear that Satan is still lying to her
regarding the message of salvation because she has not renounced the “born
again Jesus” gospel which she continues to tacitly support.

IMITATION IS THE SINCEREST FORM OF
HERESY

Latter-day Saints have imitation scriptures. Jehovah’s Witnesses have
imitation prophecies. Many within the Word-Faith or Charismatic camps, like the
Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses, have an imitation gospel. This type of
imitation is deadly. There should be no doubt that Meyer truly fosters “another
gospel.” Unbelievably, she sanctimoniously states on her tape:

“I might as well go and smack Him right in the face if I’m going to go
around and feel guilty and condemned. Every time you feel guilty and condemned
it’s just like slapping Him in the face and saying, ‘You didn’t do a good job.
You didn’t do a complete job. I’m an old rotten this and I’m an old
rotten that.’”32

Here Meyer’s “born again Jesus” gospel further takes on the elements of the
“self-love, self-image, self-esteem” gospel. Her words bear further weight to
Matzat’s charge that she is simply “telling sinners what sinners want to hear.”
The Bible never focuses on man’s worth, but on God’s love. Man does need to
experience the guilt and condemnation of his sin. It is only when man feels he
is “an old rotten this” that the eminence of Christ’s sacrifice is realized.
Therein, also, is the true working and anointing of the Holy Spirit.

PRACTICAL BUT DEADLY

While Meyer’s preaching may be folksy and down-to-earth, it isn’t biblical
when it comes to the Gospel, the crux of Christianity. Most of those who hear
or watch Meyer via radio and television, are probably
unaware that she espouses heresy. Yet Peter warns us:

“But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will
be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive
heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them bringing swift
destruction on themselves” (2 Peter 2:1, emphasis added).

In spite of this, many believe that she offers “good practical teaching.”
People may enjoy her “folksy” preaching but do they, in the long term, really
spiritually benefit from it? We cannot allow symbolism to win out over
substance. Paul reminds us, “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the
whole lump?” (1 Corinthians 5:6). Partaking of Meyer’s down-to-earth fare can
be as deadly as one trying to eat rat poison and spit out the arsenic from it
while nourishing on the cornmeal. It cannot be done. And no, the analogy of
eating the chicken and spitting out the bones (of error) just doesn’t cut it
when you consider that the average believer doesn’t have the discernment
necessary to separate heresy from orthodoxy — babies and small children are
incapable of performing such a task of bone-spitting. They choke on the bones.

Saying Joyce Meyer has practical teachings is on
the same level as saying she’s a nice person. It doesn’t matter. If you have a
nice Jehovah’s Witness or nice New Ager, the value of their message is not
established on a congenial disposition but on their core doctrinal beliefs.
False prophets, though sometimes nice or practical, are still deadly. So what
if one is a nice heretic? So what if one is a practical false
teacher? We benefit nothing from a nice and practical heretic.

The Body of Christ has so disparaged theology that even a rudimentary
understanding of heresy is not in the language of the average believer.
Practicality has become the sole standard for judging theology because all
other standards are absent. Thus, practicality wins the day by default.

Others claim that Meyer espouses a positive faith message. Yet, faith is
nothing more than trust, leaning on, clinging to, and relying upon God. What
they’re saying, in effect, is that she puts out a positive Word-Faith message.
But just how positive can a message be when you have a counterfeit gospel which
Galatians 1:8-9 says causes one to be eternally condemned? Not very positive at
all!

Consider, too, some of her practical teachings:

“Now, I don’t know what hell looks like but God gave me a few ideas. It’s
hot, fire hot, but at the same time it’s cold and clammy. That’s kind of
different, isn’t it.Fire hot, but
cold and clammy.”33

Once again, Meyer appeals to God’s intervention in going beyond the
Scriptures. Then there’s her concept that:

“Pain is a spirit. When it gets on your body, tell it to leave.”34

That would be practical advice if it worked. But it doesn’t.

HOW IMPORTANT CAN A COMMA BE?

Meyer advocates teaching that would endear her to the Jehovah’s Witnesses
and in doing so aids and encourages them. Consider her words:

“And in Luke 23:43, Jesus said unto him, ‘I say unto you today you shall
be in paradise with me.’ There’s no punctuation in the original translations of
the Bible. We have punctuated it and in this particular Scripture it was
punctuated wrong. They put in there: ‘I say unto you comma today you shall be
in paradise with me’ making it appear that the minute
Jesus died on the cross He went straight to paradise. No, no, no. He did not.
The way it should read is: ‘I say unto you today comma. I’m telling you today.
Today I’m telling you that you are going to be in paradise with me.’ But He
didn’t say, ‘You’re going to be there today.’ He said, ‘I’m telling you this
today.’”35

What Meyer attempts to do here, is explain away a key passage of Scripture
which would disprove her belief that Jesus was ushered into the depths of hell,
rather than going directly to paradise. Within Charismatic and Pentecostal
circles, “spiritual death of Jesus” advocates are relatively alone in their
desire to move the comma in Luke 23:43. However, in the cult realm, they are in
good (or not so good) company. Strident annihilationists say virtually the same
thing. Compare these comments found in a Watchtower magazine:

“In the King James Version the comma’s being placed before the
word ‘today’ makes it appear that Jesus told the evildoer that he would be in
Paradise that very same day. This would mean that Jesus would have to come into
his Kingdom, and that Jesus, as well as the evildoer, would be in Paradise on
that very day that he was speaking.”36

Additionally, the Jehovah’s Witness version of the Bible, The New World
Translation of the Holy Scriptures, renders Luke 23:43 along the lines of
Meyer’s scriptural interpretation:

“Truly I tell you today, You will be with me in
Paradise.”

Like the Watchtower, Meyer has absolutely no scholarly foundation for such a
belief. She reads into Scripture (eisegesis) whatever it takes in order to
buttress her heretical doctrine. This, too, is not very practical.

Since there are no commas used in the Greek manuscripts, the punctuation in
English must be determined by the context, as well as the other verses that
speak of Jesus’ cross work and the afterlife. That is why all versions (except The
New World Translation) have the comma after “you” and not “today” in Luke
23:43. The immediate and larger context demand that
the comma be placed where it is, in virtually every modern version.

Dr. Randolph Yaeger, in his substantial work, The Renaissance New
Testament, translates Luke 23:43: “Therefore He said to him, truly I am
telling you, Today you will be with me in Paradise.”37

Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest renders Luke 23:43: “And He said to him, Assuredly I to you am saying, Today with me you shall be in
paradise.”38

Former Jehovah’s Witness David Reed criticizes the Watchtower rationale of:
“In keeping with the context, we omit the comma before ‘today.’” And
perceptively observes: “However, what the JW translators should really say is
that ‘in keeping with their doctrine,’ they move the comma.”39

Dr. Ron Rhodes further shows the inconsistency of the moved comma:

“It is helpful to observe how the phrase, ‘Truly I say to you’ is used
elsewhere in Scripture. The phrase — which translates the Greek Words amen
soi lego — occurs 74 times in the Gospels and is always used as an
introductory expression. ... Now here’s the important point: In 73 out of the
74 times the phrase occurs in the Gospels, the New World Translation
places a break — such as a comma — immediately after the phrase, ‘Truly I tell
you.’ Luke 23:43 is the only occurrence of this phrase in which the New
World Translation does not place a break after it. Why? ... this would go against Watchtower theology. Hence the relocated comma.”40

HELPLESS HELPER

The bedrock theme of her ministry is presenting “before God intervened”
illustrations of herself along with “after God intervened” illustrations, then
giving advice on how her listeners, using the Word of God, can do the same
thing in their lives. The Charisma article seems to award her the
Christian world’s official poster girl for hurting women. Many women suffer
from mental and sexual abuse and may benefit from the advice and counsel of
someone who’s been there. This in itself is not a bad thing. But if Meyer wants
to truly teach the Bible, rightly divide the Word of Truth and affect lives in
a lasting way, she needs to get a theological education and a sound doctrinal
foundation. Real results can only be gauged by time.

We must remember that her teaching style is not the only thing that draws
large crowds — it is also her teachings. Are the teachings
sound or only that which tickle itching ears? Paul’s words in 2 Timothy
4:3-4 loom prophetic and timely for our day.

PROBLEM OR
SYMPTOM?

Joyce Meyer continues to have a huge impact upon women of every
denomination. Yet, despite her false teaching, Meyer is really not the essence
of the problem, only an evident symptom. The real problem lies within the
leadership of the Body of Christ for not teaching, emphasizing, and reinforcing
the essential doctrines of historic, orthodox Christianity and further
exhibiting how sound teaching contrasts with the aberrant and heretical
theology of the cults. Large portions of the Church’s leadership have been
lazy. Few churches have counter-cult material available to their people. Yet
this is a battle the Christian faces every day.

For too long, the Church has avoided essential Christian doctrine. Because
we don’t do our homework, we produce theologically weak Christians. As a
result, members fall prey to cults which could ultimately lead them away from a
saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. Messages from the pulpit and from Sunday School teachers rarely focus on the essentials of our faith.
If anything, they are quickly touched upon or referenced to, causing little
understanding and lots of confusion in the process. “Doctrine divides” has been
the hue and cry. Yes, doctrine does divide — that’s its very purpose. It
divides us from the Jehovah’s Witnesses and from those, like Meyer, who promote
a distorted view of Christ and His atonement.

With such a teaching vacuum created, this was bound to happen. Until the
issue of how to properly handle the Word of Truth is dealt with by the Body of
Christ, these problems are going to continue and false teachers, like Joyce
Meyer, will continue to flourish.

Finally, Meyer herself needs to be rebuked, not applauded as “The
Preacher Who Tells It Like It Is.” She plays with the truth and recreates
and fabricates her past as far as what she taught. She fails to understand
essential Christian teaching. Scripture, whether knowingly or unknowingly in
her view, is insufficient, thereby requiring “revelation knowledge” to
supplement it.

Likewise, her gospel is insufficient and needs to be supplemented with an atonement in hell. Is she really fit to be called a
minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? Her endorsement by Charisma
magazine ought to be evidence enough to disqualify her as an Evangelical
minister.

Somehow, those who really, “tell it like it is” are looked down upon
as overeducated, unanointed, critical, religious attackers. The bottom line is
that as a result of not studying to show herself approved unto God, Meyer
succumbs to heresies, promotes false teaching and does not tell it like
it is — she tells it like it isn’t.